We don't usually think of things this way -- sometimes they expect to see the call-up "earn" their shirt by practicing especially well with the big club. In that kind of situation no decision had honestly been reached on whether or not they'd play at the time of their recall.
That, or he's threatening to take his talents to the KHL and the Stars are desperately trying to pacify him.
With Wandell down, they needed an extra body in case a forward couldn't play.
If that was true, they would have called up Colton Sceviour.
While I personally don't see the benefit, we know from Heika that GMJN believes just being around the team is good for a prospect.
I personally prefer to have a guy play games even if it's in the AHL, but I see this is now an organizational belief that I probably just need to get use too.
If that was true, they would have called up Colton Sceviour.
While I personally don't see the benefit, we know from Heika that GMJN believes just being around the team is good for a prospect.
I personally prefer to have a guy play games even if it's in the AHL, but I see this is now an organizational belief that I probably just need to get use too.
Maybe they wanted to call up a more skilled forward in case it was a top line guy who wasn't going to be able to play. If Morrow or Loui was unable to go, do you want the team putting spares like Wandell or Vincour on those top lines? Of course not. Fraser is a better fit.
You are putting far too much emphasis on any young player being scratched, even if it's for one game. It does not matter one bit. Fraser's career and development will not be negatively affected at all by him getting called up for a few days.
This stuff happens with every team every season. When players at the NHL level get hurt, the NHL team calls players up from the AHL. Sometimes they call up more veteran minor leaguers. Sometimes they call up kids. I don't see anything about this call up being out of the ordinary. It's what NHL teams have been doing for decades.
I'm not putting too much emphasis on anything. I said that it's obviously something this team likes to do so I'm going to learn to live with it.
.... and who was talking about Wandell or Vincour? I mentioned Sceviour. You indicated that the purpose of calling up Fraser was they needed an extra body. If that was true and the only reason, then they would have called up Sceviour.
Fraser's call up isn't just about an extra forward. They already said this is a reward for his efforts in the AHL.
I'm not putting too much emphasis on anything. I said that it's obviously something this team likes to do so I'm going to learn to live with it.
.... and who was talking about Wandell or Vincour? I mentioned Sceviour. You indicated that the purpose of calling up Fraser was they needed an extra body. If that was true and the only reason, then they would have called up Sceviour.
Fraser's call up isn't just about an extra forward. They already said this is a reward for his efforts in the AHL.
I'm still not sure why the bolded part has to be true. They needed a warm body and picked a guy who had been playing really well.
If by chance the conditioning assignment is an opportunity to showcase Wandell for a trade, Lake Erie is Colorado's affiliate, and Texas plays them again tonight.
COL needs forwards and has some extra D. I still think the perfect situation would be flipping Wandell for D depth. He's probably done in Dallas. Roussel would be the first option likely if a center goes down, and I wouldn't be all that surprised if they went with Sceviour over Wandell if a 2nd center went down. On wing, I think they'd play Vincour and Fraser over Wandell, and I think Sceviour again would probably get the nod over him. If Chiasson was healthy, he could be ahead of Wandell at wing depth.
If by chance the conditioning assignment is an opportunity to showcase Wandell for a trade, Lake Erie is Colorado's affiliate, and Texas plays them again tonight.
COL needs forwards and has some extra D. I still think the perfect situation would be flipping Wandell for D depth. He's probably done in Dallas. Roussel would be the first option likely if a center goes down, and I wouldn't be all that surprised if they went with Sceviour over Wandell if a 2nd center went down. On wing, I think they'd play Vincour and Fraser over Wandell, and I think Sceviour again would probably get the nod over him. If Chiasson was healthy, he could be ahead of Wandell at wing depth.
What kind of return do you think Larsen+Wandell+Vincour would bring?
What kind of return do you think Larsen+Wandell+Vincour would bring?
Colorado doesn't have the value for that. Barrie or Elliot are the only guys I'd be interested in, and I'm not sure I'd trade Larsen alone for either of them or that Colorado would consider that.
Would rather do what BigG said, stick with a Wandell + something small for a depth defender. Colorado's defense is made up of a #1 in EJ, two promising young rookies, and everyone else is a bottom-pairing guy or a scratch.
Colorado doesn't have the value for that. Barrie or Elliot are the only guys I'd be interested in, and I'm not sure I'd trade Larsen alone for either of them or that Colorado would consider that.
Would rather do what BigG said, stick with a Wandell + something small for a depth defender. Colorado's defense is made up of a #1 in EJ, two promising young rookies, and everyone else is a bottom-pairing guy or a scratch.
Didn't say it would be a trade with Colorado. Just what he thinks they could return.
Didn't say it would be a trade with Colorado. Just what he thinks they could return.
Ah, my bad.
An upgrade on Larsen. Not a significant enough one to warrant trading two bottom six forwards who still have top six potential (I do think Wandell has at least a bit left, but I'm not expecting anything from him). Unless a team really liked one of those guys, we're probably better off keeping them.
An upgrade on Larsen. Not a significant enough one to warrant trading two bottom six forwards who still have top six potential (I do think Wandell has at least a bit left, but I'm not expecting anything from him). Unless a team really liked one of those guys, we're probably better off keeping them.
Vincour is a bottom six player and Wandell can't even crack the NHL roster.
I'm wondering if it would be better to trade them all of individually, or in a package.
Vincour is a bottom six player and Wandell can't even crack the NHL roster.
I'm wondering if it would be better to trade them all of individually, or in a package.
Where did I say they weren't?
You can't tell me Vincour doesn't have potential. Look at what he's doing in the AHL, and explain to me why that can't happen in the NHL. I'm not saying it will, but there's no reason to think that he's peaked as an NHL player.
Wandell, although he's probably done developing, still has a bit of top 6 potential IMO. He's got the speed and the hands, and there are times you can see him put it all together. I think most of that is just mental for him, which he could just randomly get over at any time. But still, I wouldn't count on it. And he's at worst a 4th line winger, we just don't have room for him anymore.
Would rather stick with our own players than get a minimal upgrade on Larsen at best.
An upgrade on Larsen. Not a significant enough one to warrant trading two bottom six forwards who still have top six potential (I do think Wandell has at least a bit left, but I'm not expecting anything from him). Unless a team really liked one of those guys, we're probably better off keeping them.
